Verified Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

142 Sterling

About 80Tiger

  • Rank
    Dept Head
  • Birthday
  1. I think you are right coach about him being depth and I hope you are right. No need to move Golson if we do not have to IMO. Also hate to give up Golson's size. I think I saw where this guy is around 285. Crazy to say but seems that one needs to be 300 plus to play o line in SEC.
  2. I agree. Just don't see the 165 lb guy holding up for very many touches a game. BB would be much more of a true RB.
  3. Well there are 32 automatic bids and I would guess half of those would be teams that would not receive a bid otherwise. So 64 teams less 16 or so that are lower tier champions, means that there our RPI would need to be 48 or less IMO but what do I know.
  4. It's been a while but Garner has coached TE before at AU.
  5. Rocker out at UGA
  6. For whatever reason it is beginning to look like this board is the only group that holds DC in such high regard.
  7. I hope it is Barrett. While I certainly like our current running backs, we still need a guy with that size that has the real speed needed to go 70+ yds at any time. Hopefully he can be it.
  8. And while I don't think it cost us Dwatson it sure didn't help.
  9. If this is what he said back in June and then watched our LB play this year, I could see that possibly making a difference for him.
  10. I saw Frank Thomas play in high school. Not only the biggest, but fastest and most athletic guy on the field. I think he went to AU to do both and then went just baseball after a year. Probably would have been HOF in football if he had done that.
  11. The point is, if you are going to throw out a statistical outlier due to bad game planning, then should you not throw out the best performance as a statistical outlier due to good game planning? I am not calling anyone out, but there seems to be a habit of not wanting to count a certain type performance if it does not fit a narrative. I am not saying Stat did that by any means, but if you are going to have all these objective numerical performance but discount bad performance due to a subjective reasoning (bad game planning) then sometimes the numbers will lose some meaning (IMO). Its like dropped passes. A lot of moaning an groaning about dropped passes and how it made QB (choose your name) look bad and affected his numbers, but at the same time receivers will make ridiculous catches that will make the QB numbers look good but we give credit to the QB for a completion (which we should). My point is, to me you have to count bad with good no matter what. The numbers are what they are. Otherwise you tend to fool yourselves.
  12. E, I see so much posting about how this guy recruits or that guy recruits. Historically coaches were responsible and recruited "geographic" locations and not by the position they coached. This allowed the coach to build relationships with high school coaches and with the underclassmen high school guys that they get to know. I know position coaches are brought in eventually because a recruit wants to know who would be playing for. So with all that said, who is responsible for "closing" the deal with a recruit? The "geographic area" guy or the position coach?
  13. Some good info but do not agree with discounting the Clemson game. If you are going to discount the "bad game plan" then you have to throw out the "good game plan" performance. Maybe the first half of the MSU game. I have seen many post on here that our staff is not good at evaluating talent. I actually think our staff evaluated our QB talent correctly last year. No matter who was in playing, we did not throw long because we couldn't so we didn't try much. We need an upgrade in talent at the position. I hope JS, WB and Gatewood are it. I hope CCL brings the balance needed between run and pass no matter the down. I believe tha talent at AU is superior to ASU and the improvement will be seen.
  14. The way we as fans are, after the GSU games, we will have segment putting us the playoffs for next year, and the other segment wanting to fire Gus on the spot.
  15. This. We wanted DW very badly. You can see why.